Opinion
Column

Attending an Easter service at a village Anglican church in the Georgian triangle last Sunday was sadly disappointing. It seems that in spite of all the increased knowledge about the history and nature of the New Testament gained over the past century and in spite of the incredible changes in our understanding of the cosmos itself, nothing whatever has changed in Anglican circles when it comes to worship.

This, of course, has been obvious for quite some time and is the major cause of a rapidly diminishing flock and tragic number of churches being forced to close right across the country.

The situation is complex, but one misunderstanding in particular struck home during this Easter eucharist. As one reflects upon it, the problem is huge and emerges as fundamental to all types of Christians today. Christianity has failed to see and embody the inescapable truth that there are two religions and not just one when it comes to trying to understand and set forth the Jesus portrayed in the Bible.

Clearly the initial and basic religious outlook of the Gospels’ Jesus of Nazareth is that of a pious or faithful first-century Jew. Indeed one of the major themes of the past century’s Jesus scholarship has been the rediscovery of the Jewishness of Jesus. A reforming Jewish figure, yes, but a devout Jew nonetheless. Judaism, then, is the religion of Jesus as the evangelists introduced him. However, there is a second face that emerges and eventually swallows up the first. That is the religion about Jesus.

That these two religions are not the same becomes evident once this distinction is digested. What is more, the second of these eventually became the dominant note of all that follows, including church councils (principally Nicea in 325 under Emperor Constantine, held to establish that Jesus is equal to God in substance, etc.), heresies of every stripe, persecutions and all the rest of what is often a very bloody and unhappy story.

Everyone knows the Romans persecuted the Christians. Little is known by your average citizen about how the Christians — once they became allied with the temporal powers — persecuted the pagans, burning their libraries, destroying their centres of learning and tearing down their places of worship.

If it had not been for the labours of Islamic scholars centuries later preserving in Arabic the works of some of the greatest writers of the Classical period, many of the most priceless writings of the pre-Christian era would have been lost forever. The Renaissance that later sprang in great part from these same books would never have taken place. Those who see all Muslims as enemies of the West need frequent reminding of that because too little is known of this beyond academic circles.

The truth is, as I pointed out and documented in For Christ’s Sake, the Jesus of the Gospels never calls himself God. That would have been anathema for any truly religious Jew. When the rich young ruler calls him “good master” or teacher, the Gospel writer has him respond “Why do you call me good? There is none good except God.” There’s an echo of this same Jewish feel to the story when instead of using the phrase “the Kingdom of God,” Jesus is made to say “the Kingdom of Heaven.” It was a way to avoid taking God’s name in vain. No Orthodox Jew today ever uses the name itself.

I am convinced if the early Christians had distinguished between the religion of Jesus and the religion about Jesus, not only would much bloodshed have been avoided but current Christianity would be a much greater power for global harmony and healing — as well as more relevant and joyous for all seeking to know God.

— Tom Harpur is a best-selling author on spiritual and ethical issues. www.tomharpur.com